SH14/H - Market Hall

Support

Representation ID: 388

Received: 22/02/2021

Respondent: Mrs Dominique Gaspar

This market hall is in desperate need of redevelopment and I fully support a mixed use scheme. I think the views of the wider community and how they would like to use the space should be taken into consideration. I think a mix of housing, community space, retail and hospitality could work well here. My only concern about housing is whether or not parking and traffic could be an issue.

Support

Representation ID: 1128

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Tamsin Treasure-Jones

I support the plans for the redevelopment of sites such as SH14/H - buildings within Shipley Town Centre. One of the issues with the town centre is the state of the higher levels of the buildings. If these can be redeveloped into apartments this would both help deliver housing and improve the look of the town centre itself. Another brownfield area which could be considered is shown in the area I have highlighted on the attached map of the SH14/H development. I may not have marked it correctly, but there are a number of disused shops or buildings (one of which appears to be owned by the Council) on the A657 (Saltaire Road). Some clever development here could not only provide housing, but could also open up another access to the bottom of Crowgill Park, a recreation area that is (in my opinion) currently under-used due to its isolated feel.

Support

Representation ID: 4773

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Robert Flitcroft

Introducing mixed use development into Shipley town centre is welcomed as it introduces the community back into the area.

Support

Representation ID: 4945

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Barbara Kelly

Brownfield site and suitable for a mixed development, the whole area is getting neglected and in need of a face lift.

Support

Representation ID: 4967

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Mr Ian Corker

Good location for regeneration.

Support

Representation ID: 5502

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Ms Frances Guy

Support investment in Market Hall but I would object if this was at the expense of losing the clocktower which is a local landmark. So refurb and perhaps some rebuild to enable dwellings although perhaps a reimagining of the 'market hall' to provide small work or live/work units might be more desirable than flats in this area? Or spaces for use by community organisations creating a community hub?

Comment

Representation ID: 28741

Received: 24/03/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Site in Flood Zone 1 ONLY
Mitigation should be set above the 1 in 100 plus cc level for the site as suitable for the proposed vulnerability classification (EA standing advice should cover this).

If the site is considered Greenfield then surface water discharge rates post development should be restricted to the pre development Greenfield discharge rate. If the site is considered Brownfield then there should be a 30% reduction in surface water discharges, or restricted to Greenfield rates, there should be no increase in brownfield surface water discharge rates post development. So as to support prevention of cumulative increases to flood risk and should be in line with SuDs design principles.

For developments near ordinary watercourses we would recommend an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts, to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. A Flood Defence Consent may be required for the LLFA for works in/affecting an ordinary watercourse.

For main rivers, we generally require an 8 metre easement strip along the length of the riverbank to be kept clear of permanent structures such as buildings, or a 45degree angle from the bed in the case of culverts. This is to maintain access to the riverbank for any improvements or maintenance. Environmental Flood Risk Activity Permits may be required for development near rivers.

It is possible the sites within close proximity to Flood Zones 3b, 3 and 2 may be subject to future risk identified within the SFRA (to follow) which may affect its allocation or how development should be sequentially laid out on the site.

Consideration must be made to making space for water and providing betterment in terms of flood risk management where ever possible.

Support

Representation ID: 29323

Received: 29/03/2021

Respondent: Historic England

The site is within the Saltaire World Heritage Site (WHS) buffer zone. The development of this area could harm elements which contribute to the significance of the World Heritage Site. The site is currently allocated for development within the Bradford City Centre Area Action Plan (AAP), adopted in December 2017. The principle of allocating this site, for the nature and scale of development set out in the APP, has therefore been recently established as part of the Local Development Plan for Bradford District. In order to safeguard these heritage assets, we would expect the Local Plan equirements for this site relating to the conservation
and enhancement of the historic environment to, as a minimum, reflect those set out in the AAP. Consequently, we welcome that the Development Considerations and Constraints & Opportunities identified for this site in the Draft Local Plan reflect those in the AAP